Abstract: Why did tears in Roman courts convince though everybody knew them to be a strategy? By departing from the case of Pro Plancio, the paper discusses Cicero’s habits as a patronus. Cicero continued stressing his close personal links to his clients and friends. In his performances, he subscribed to the shared ethos of patronage and friendship demanding true dedication. As amicitia, and patronage, were rooted in shared values that ultimately referred to the ethos of the republican elite, everybody addicted to these values also had to follow Cicero’s argumentation. At least this is what his rhetorical skills demanded on a rational, and an emotional, level. But what about the assumption that orators had to be emotionally moved themselves when wanting to convince their audience? The paper argues that Cicero s lifelong acting as a patronus ultimately made himself believe that he indeed was the emotionally moved, truly dedicated patronus he pretended to be, and he really was when performing in court.